\section{\SM{} on behalf of application side}
\label{sec:SM_behalf_application}

\subsection{Application characteristics}
\label{sec:application_characteristics}
\indent \SM{} can provide a lot of information regarding applications. We
captured all these characteristics on the paper with \textsf{key
users}. You can see the document in annexe~\ref{an:aot}. 
All these carateristics can't be written on the Visio \SM{}. That's
why, we decided to show only few of them in order the \SM{} to be more
readable. Table~\ref{tab:properties_visio_database} presents it.

\begin{table}
\begin{longtable}{|>{\bfseries}c|l|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & \tbf{On visio map} & \tbf{In database} \endfirsthead
\hline
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & \tbf{On visio map} & \tbf{In database}\\
\multicolumn{4}{|r|}{Continued\dots} \\ \endhead
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|r|}{Continued on next page\dots} \\ \hline  \endfoot \hline
\multicolumn{4}{|r|}{And.} \\ \hline \endlastfoot 
\hline
\multirow{17}*{Application} & Name & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Version                & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Family (Access, \dots) & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Site                   & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Business Area          & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Business criticality   & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Type (global, local)   & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Technology (Web, \dots)& N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Purpose                & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Key user               & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Number of user         & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Supplier               & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Efficiency             & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Profit                 & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Active                 & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Inactive               & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Retied                 & N & Y \\ 
\hline
\multirow{3}*{Licence} & Licence type (PC, user) & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Expiry date            & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Cost                   & N & Y \\ 
\hline
\multirow{12}*{Infrastructure} & Hardware requirements & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& \% of cpu usage        & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Bandwith               & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Host machine location  & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Host machine name      & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Host machine IP        & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Technology (mainframe) & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Type (server, switch)  & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& CPU                    & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Memory (RAM)           & Y & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Disk space             & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Connectivity           & Y & Y \\ 
\hline
\multirow{6}*{Support} & 1st line support & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Environment support    & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Functionnal support    & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Technical support      & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Hardware support       & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Strategy of support    & N & Y \\ 
\hline
\multirow{5}*{Other} & Installation procedure & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Disaster recovery      & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Associated database    & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Dependant database     & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Backup requirement     & N & Y \\ \cline{2-4}
& Replacement date       & N & Y \\
\hline
\end{longtable}
\caption{Application properties captured in database and written on
draft}
\label{tab:properties_visio_database}
\end{table}


\subsection{Different link between applications}
\label{sec:link_between_applications}
\indent We identified 3 differents types of link between the applications:
\begin{description}
\item[manual:] Nothing is automated. User need to type manually the
data into the application.\\
\item[semi-automatic:] Person A export data to a file from
application AA. A attach the file to an email and send it to person
B. Person B receive the email, dettach the file and load the data into
application BB.\\
\item[automatic] User don't have to do anything. Application A send
automatically data to the application B.
\end{description}


\subsection{Feedback from an operational team}
\indent Jean-Christophe \tsc{Pierson} is part of a local support team. In
Haguenau, approximately 60 local applications are supported by the
team, but more than double are used, and the team has a lot of
difficulties to keep control, and don't have a correct view of them.
This is a big issue, and that's why we are stakeholder.

The structure of \tsf{Regional Support} team is central. Most of the
people are on \tsf{HUB sites}, and only few associates are on the
small sites. \SM{} will help the team in two ways:
\begin{itemize}
\item Prevent risks on small sites. It means that we have a complete
view of a remote site, and can assume support even if local ressources
are not available;
\item Do application governance for big sites. With the \SM{}, the
team can decide priorities, replacements, evolution of applications in
use.
\end{itemize}

In both case, \SM{} will help us to:
\begin{itemize}
\item Discover the critical components (time bombs, obsolet or
duplicate application);
\item Make the communication easier between the different teams;
\item Increase application efficiency;
\item Do licence management;
\item Do change management, because \SM{} contains all links
between applications, and between application and infrastructure;
\item Help in measuring and managing capacity (end to end
performance);
\item Identify manual processes in the business;
\item Do impact analysis.
\end{itemize}


\subsection{Maps in \tsf{MS Visio}}
\indent Here are some partial view of the result obtained with \tsf{MS Visio}.
You can see the legend on the first figure (\ref{fig:sm_partial0}),
and the second figure (\ref{fig:sm_partial1}) show another part of the
\SM{}.

\begin{landscape}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=24cm]{graph/sm_partial0}
	\caption{Partial view of Application layer of \SM{}}
	\label{fig:sm_partial0}
\end{figure}
\end{landscape}
\begin{landscape}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=24cm]{graph/sm_partial1}
	\caption{Partial view of Application layer of \SM{} (2nd)}
	\label{fig:sm_partial1}
\end{figure}

\end{landscape}


